Of course Obama supports gay marriage. Of course once he is free of the need to get reelected he will do everything within the power of the Executive Branch to effect a de facto federal policy change. Of course he has not been truthful with his “evolving” narrative.

Jake Tapper had it right the other day:

Obama has an interview with ABC News this afternoon in which he is expected to make a statement about his position.

In an interview with ABC News’ Robin Roberts, the president described his thought process as an “evolution” that led him to this place, based on conversations with his own staff members, openly gay and lesbian service members, and conversations with his wife and own daughters.

“I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told Roberts, in an interview to appear on ABC’s “Good Morning America” Thursday…

The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own. But he said he’s confident that more Americans will grow comfortable with gays and lesbians getting married, citing his own daughters’ comfort with the concept.

Don’t say you didn’t see it coming:

New Narrative:Notorious homophobe Mitt Romney holds gay-marriage position held by Barack Obama until 45 seconds ago.

For us..its a curiosity how he is going to lie this time and appear to please everyone.
But for Democrats that are shocked…shocked with the barbaric passage of the law?
Its right out of the Wizard of Oz. The wicked witch has just written Surrender Dorothy in the sky.
They are afraid…”we must ask the Wizard…hell know what it means”
Hence the big story will appear on all news channels.
The wizard will speak.

On the evolutionary voyage the HMS Beagle visited the Gilliganos Islands where Professor Obama, marvelling at the diversity of giant tortoises and marine iguanas, months later on a November day, witnessed Homo fedupis in the act of natural selection.

If I could draw, Obama would be a crocodile basking on the riverbank with his mouth held wide open.

Carney would be the symbiotic stork which the crocodile lets enter his mouth to pick out the meat stuck between his teeth.

The stork would be standing on top of the crocodile’s head, yelling across the river to the herd of wildebeest unsure of attempting to cross, telling them that the crocodile is evolving on the subject of meat eating.

No, gays don’t already vote Dem, at least not in sufficient numbers. Not like blacks vote Dem. He knows the blacks are going to vote for him despite this decision; he’s not afraid of losing them. But he is desperately afraid of losing the gay vote, and the gay-friendly vote, because without it he’s doomed. Yesterday’s results showed him that he’s not going to get anywhere with the rust-belt voters; they remain “bitter clingers”, and there’s no point in wooing them. So he’s going for the socially liberal vote instead, and that means he had to throw them this bone.

1. So why doesn’t he name some of the people he consulted, or why don’t they come forward?

2. …when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf…

It’s always all about Himself, isn’t it?

3. The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own.

Unless explicitly excluded by SCOTUS or amendment, the next step will be a push, probably in the courts, to claim that since some states recognize gay marriage, they all have to. If Obama said nothing about that concern, he’s lying by omission.

4. Did Obama use his moral authority as President to address the disproportionate opposition to gay marriage by black voters? Just wondering.

5. IMHO in some years there may be institutionally abetted pressure on public school students to engage in bisexual experimentation. If teens refuse to go out with somebody, they’d best not admit it’s because of sexual orientation.

Sounds ridiculous? Twenty years ago, the notion that “gay rights” would lead to gay marriage was scoffed at.

>>Twenty years ago, the notion that “gay rights” would lead to gay marriage was scoffed at.<<

Very true. And it can largely be attributed to one man, software billionaire Tim Gill.

Getting gay marriage legalized in as many states as possible has been Gill's obsession since the mid 1990s. He has used his vast wealth to create a non-profit lobbing firm called Gill Action Fund to lobby legislators for its passage. And for those legislators who oppose it, he targets them for removal in elections. In the first couple of years he was using only his money, but now all the usual progressive suspects donate to Gill Action Fund.

I think you can make the case that Gill Action Fund has been one of the most effective lobbying organizations ever. It didn't matter what the voters, taxpayers, or citizens of the states he targeted wanted. It was all about what Tim Gill wanted. He is the poster boy for how money has corrupted our democracy.

Now Cyndi Lauper has come out and said she is “all for” Obama’s “evolving on gay marriage.”

Never have I, in all my ironic glory, witnessed so many people praying for evolution.

Evolution is in many ways like sh*t … it just happens.

If a person has already determined the correct direction of their “evolution” on an issue and the correct final goal of their “evolution,” on that issue and they can’t get there, it’s then just a case of devolution to a more primitive, deceitful state.

My God … the lowliest invertebrates are more sincere and determined in their evolution.

So Barry suddenly has discovered State’s rights? Now that not just evolving, that’s revolutionary. Next he’s going to be claiming that he, and not Regan, was the real small government president. Oh, wait . . .

Um, he is their commander. The defense of the USA is his job, and they are the people he has hired to do it for him. Just like all executive branch employees work for him, because the constitution says that he is the executive.

You idiot. The US military DOES NOT fight on behalf on any political party or member, they fight on behalf of this country! This ain’t North Korea!

As for federal employees, they are just that: EMPLOYEES! They can quit anytime they want, military personnel sign up with a check of time made out the USA, not some clueless “God_D8mn_America”-sermon-listening America_loathing_moron like Barry Soetero!

At the risk of earning multiple thumbs down replies, here, as a conservative Republican with a strong libertarian streak in him, I would say that

1) I have no problem with gay marriage (I’m in a straight marriage so I’m not up for, er, grabs)

2) I would let states resolve the matter (since I’m also a Federalist)

So if I didn’t already understand that Champ is an incompetent, egomaniacal lying weasel who is completely unqualified for a second term as President, and shouldn’t have had a first term, I would say, “well pal, I understand you’re conflicted. That happens.”

Lots of people are conflicted about gay marriage. I don’t hold it against anyone, not even a politician, and I don’t hold this against Champ. After all, I have so many other reasons to dislike the man and what he’s done to our country.

Slightly related but slightly not: advocates of gay marriage should not be discouraged by the NC vote. Rather they should understand that 40% (roughly) of NC voters are on their side. A generation ago it would have been 10%. In another generation, who knows?

Take heart. Work quietly, educate gently, persuade softly, and show your straight fellow citizens that what you want isn’t a threat to them. It will take a while, but work with legislators and citizens.

But for goodness sakes don’t go looking for a few ‘learned’ people in black robes and powdered wigs to find an emanation of a penumbra in the Constitution that guarantees gay marriage. What a court calls legal today, another court can call illegal tomorrow. Having the courts implement gay marriage simply will make it as controversial as Roe v Wade has made abortion. That’s not the direction you want to go.

I’m happy to have gay people enjoy all the CIVIL benefits of married status (which I can provide them under current law…pretty much). The tax code presents a problem, but THAT is another corrupt can of worms altogether.

But “marriage” has a long cultural, discrete, and rational meaning. It is a meaning that is not plastic according to whim or societal fad.

It is not a mere contract between consenting adults.

Two members of the same sex are NOT the equal of two members of opposite sexes. Whether you approach that from religious or purely biological terms, they simply are not. A man’s brain and woman’s brain are so different, one researcher in brain function observed we are almost two species…which is really good. We approach problems/threats with a very wide view to solutions/adaptation.

I think there are several different agendas involved in this. While many people do not have a problem accepting homosexuality, for many gays this is not enough they not only want acceptance they want approval. Acceptance is a mental process while approval is an emotional process.

I used to be a liberal, a dem, but I’m now an independent, I sort of agree with your post. I don’t have a problem with gay marriage, what I do have a problem with is the federal govt shoving it down on everyone.
I’m fiscally constitutional pretty conservative, but socially liberal, libertarian.
I firmly believe if a people in a state wants to redefine gay marriage, I say they can under the 10th amend., so NH can do that, just as NC can ban it yesterday.
I don’t like the fed govt dictating things to the states. So long as an indiv is not discriminated, and has equal rights under the law, then I have no issues with a state banning gay marriage, I don’t agree with it, but I respect the state’s right to do so.

If at a federal level they try to do this, then the federal govt is interfering in the states, and this is nothing like civil rights, where an individual was discriminated against because of their skin color. This is an issue of marriage, a defintion of marriage, not the rights of an indiv.

Frankly, I think this whole thing is a distraction, I support gay marriage according to a state’s views, and I still won’t be voting or supporting that idiot in the WH.

[…] Carolina went to the polls. Electorally Obama found himself in a smoking frying pan. Today’s down low switch hitting ploy on gay marriage will have grave electoral consequences. But the great danger for Obama is that other groups will […]

[…] that, having declared his personal view, Obama has exhausted his gutsiness; this is from ABC News: http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/05…ge-gutsy-call/ The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the […]

[…] for US Senate running away from Obama as fast as he can: If you want a sense of how Obama’s cynical, money-driven gay marriage evolution ploy will play in key states Obama won in 2008, look not only […]